Jugal Kishor Pradhan vs ITO

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Jugal Kishor Pradhan, is in the business of trading iron and steel scrap. He filed his original return of income on 27/08/2012 and subsequently filed a return of income on receipt of notice u/s 148 of the Act declaring a total income of Rs.8,08,633/-. The Assessing Officer treated purchases of Rs.31,02,845/- as bogus and estimated 10% of these purchases as gross income. The Assessing Officer also made an addition of Rs.6 lakhs u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained credits. The assessee argued that the purchases were genuine and that the cash deposits in question were actually cheque deposits. The assessee provided bank account and ledger copies to support his claims.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the assessee is liable to be assessed at a total income of Rs.44,05,290/-.
• 2. Whether the final assessment order dated 23/12/2019 is invalid for not quoting the mandatory Documentation Identification Number (DIN).
• 3. Whether the addition of Rs.31,02,845/- by treating genuine purchases as bogus is valid.
• 4. Whether the addition of Rs.6,00,000/- on account of unexplained credit u/s 68 of the Act is valid.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Income Tax Officer, Rohtak vs Vijender Goyal

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2021-22Dismissed

• Gargi Overseas Pvt. Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Delhi

  Delhi Bench 'A', New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1) vs M/s A.R. Alloys Pvt. Ltd.

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2015-16Partly Allowed

• ITA No. 5252/MUM/2024 (AY: 2011-12)

  SMC Bench, Mumbai benchAY 2011-12Dismissed

• Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Mumbai Versus Kanak Impex (India) Ltd.

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2009-10Allowed

• Santosh Laujari Gupta Vs ITO – 33(3)(3)

  SMC Bench, Mumbai benchAY 2009-10Partly Allowed